and many more benefits!

Find us on Facebook

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]
09 Dec 2005, 15:44

3

This post receivedKUDOS

18

This post wasBOOKMARKED

00:00

A

B

C

D

E

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

50%(02:05) correct
50%(01:04) wrong based on 1434 sessions

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

A) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing

B) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in

C) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing

D) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in

E) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing

Let me see if I interpret your question correctly. You are asking, I believe, how the participial modifiers work with commas.

1. The sea creatures floated merrily along the water, waving their blubbery flippers.

2. The sea creatures floated merrily along the water waving their blubbery flippers.

In the first case, 'waving their...' refers to the subject of the sentence because of the comma between the participial phrase and the noun water. When I remove the comma, as I did in #2, an illogical comparison arises. Now the water is waving blubbery flippers (which, despite the arresting visual, is clearly nonsensical).

In the original question, in answer choice (A) the participial phrase 'possibly resulting' illogically modifies 'creatures'. You allude to this error. It sounds that the MGMAT folks may have been saying that getting rid of the comma would correct this faulty modification: '...were suffering from dwindling supplies possibly resulting from increasing...'. Nevertheless, this phrase sounds a bit awkward and is not as direct as (B).

a) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing - suffering from (a disease).WRONG.

b) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in - suffering because (of a reason)

c) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing - changes the meaning. the creatures were suffering from a lack of food supplies. WRONG

d) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in - need that. WRONG

e) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing - need that. WRONG

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1986 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

A. that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasingB. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in C. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing D. creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in E. creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing

Split #2: the word "because" is a subordinate clause that must be followed by a full [NOUN] + [VERB] clause. In (C), the word "because" is followed by a noun, "food supplies", but no verb. This commits the missing verb mistake, and is wrong.

Now we are down to (A) & (B). Choice (A) makes a modifier mistake ---- the participle "resulting" should modify the noun it touches, but the "food supplies" were not "resulting from an increasing sea surface temperature". Also, that phrase "an increasing sea surface temperature" is very awkward. It's much clearer to say "an increase in sea surface temperature", which is precisely what (B) has.

Choice (B) is the only answer that is absolutely free of grammatical error. It may not be rhetorically ideal, but it is clearly the best of the five answer choices here.

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]
01 Aug 2014, 22:49

2

This post receivedKUDOS

Hi,I am sharing my analysis on mentioned question.Request you to review and confirm, if I am on the right track. I appreciate your support.

1.A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed something.2.They revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies.3.The dwindling of food supplies was possibly resulted from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

1. 3:2 split by "that creatures" & "creatures".Does it help in making the right choice.No.

2. What's the issue with the Q? Modifier issue.What needs to be modified "the dwindling of food prices".

1."resulting from increasing" in A&D are comma + ing modifier so must modify the clause and make sense with the sub of clause. Here the modifier shall modify "dwindling food supplies".In option A Sub is "creatures" and in D Sub is "food supplies" so both the options are out.

2.Option C: creatures .. were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing."which" correctly modifies "supplies" but makes it a non essential part whereas it should be essential to complete the meaning of sentence. I doesn't make sense to say "creatures were suffering because of food supplies" so the other is an essential info.

3.Option E:dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing. We need to modify "dwindling food prices" not dwindling. Again "which" issue simillar to C. So out.

Correct answer:B) creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling,[Dependent clause] possibly as a result of an increase in [prepositional modifier modifying the DC] _________________

13 A study of food resources in the North Pacific between [#permalink]
13 May 2008, 00:49

1

This post receivedKUDOS

13 A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.a) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasingb) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase inc) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasingd) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase ine) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing _________________

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

a) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasingYou suffer from a disease or something like that...not from dwindling food supplies....boom!!b) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase inCorrectc) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasingwere is ambiguous here....fishes or food supplies dwindling??....hmmm boom!!d) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase inThe study did not reveal creatures, but the fact that creatures were sufferinge) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasingThe study did not reveal creatures, but the fact that creatures were suffering

I think the previous posters are correct that the correct answer is B, and that part of the reason that A cannot be correct is that A says the creatures suffered from dwindling food supplies, which doesn't make any sense.

that said, I'll still try to answer your question about "as a result of" vs "resulting from,"

in this sentence, just look at this segment: "... that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from ..."

now remove "of the seabed" and "from dwindling food supplies," to remove some of the clutter of the sentence, because you want to be able to see clearly what the "possibly resulting from" part of the sentence is referring to. that leaves you with "... that creatures ... were suffering ... , possibly resulting from ..."

now you should be able to see pretty clearly that the phenomenon whose cause the sentence is trying to explain is the creatures' suffering, and not the dwindling food supplies. the dwindling food supplies is a secondary point in the sentence. the main issue is the suffering of the creatures. hopefully you can see that when you remove some of the supporting details?

now the question becomes: do creatures sufferas a result of something, or do they sufferresulting from something? only the first choice is correct, because "resulting from" can only be used with a noun, while "as a result of" is used with verbs. since suffer is a verb, "as a result of" must be used.

This is one of those questions that the GMAC folks have focused on - namely you come down to 2 answer choices but the correct answer choice is the one that makes sense within the sentence - though gramatically both can be correct.

In this case, C does not make sense because creatures of the seabed were NOT suffering BECAUSE of food supplies. They were suffering because the food supplies were DWINDLING.

How the sentence is structured comes to this reasoning, though in speech you may have heard people talking this way. But on the GMAT exam, it's not a sentence that makes sense. _________________

I would rather take a less tortuous route to get this solved. An increasing temperature means an on going and continuing affair without a cap and hence is illogical. On the contrary, an increase denotes a certain amount of increase in temperature that has ceased to increase after the spurt. This is acceptable

So we have a cause to dump A, C and E. Coming to B and D, In D, the usage ‘creatures of the seabed that were suffering’ flouts touch rule of the relative pronoun. So there is enough reason to choose B, not withstanding the debate about the modification _________________

I fully agree that in your example, the word sending is certainly a gerund; However In the case of increasing temps, the expression increasing of temps, would have made it straighter.

If this sentence is flipped it will read as follows: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that increasing temperatures (an increase in temperatures) during the same period possibly caused the dwindling of food supplies, which in turn caused the creatures of the seabed to suffer. Perhaps, this would make it clear what caused what. As per this, it looks as if the temperatures were the initiators of the whole phenomenon.

But IMO, the prime purpose of this topic, would be to test whether 1. We can make a distinction between increasing temperatures and an increase in temperature and whether 2. We can elicit the necessity of using the connector ‘that’ in a reported text such as this. _________________

At first glance,I would eliminate A,D,E. Then as far as B and C are concerned...C is unclear about the " Which " ,whether it is referring to the food supplies or the creatures of the sea!! So IMO B as my answer :D

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1986 [#permalink]
13 Aug 2013, 02:16

1

This post receivedKUDOS

Dhairya275 wrote:

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1986 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

A. that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasingB. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in C. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing D. creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in E. creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing

IMO BSOME THEORIES:-verb-ing =>when followed by a (clause+comma) either modify -whole clause or -show result .-which =>this can never refer to whole clause it either refers to noun or noun phrase.

A. that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasingWRONG.-Dwindling food supplies =>it seems that food supplies were dwindling by itself.=>illigical.-wrong usage of verb-ing after (clause+comma)=>neither showing result of previous clause nor describing previous clause.

B. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase inRIGHT.

C. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing WRONG.-The part starting from WHICH WERE..{...}is acting as a modifier..now if you remove this modifier you can easily see that sentence is incomplete hence a fragment.

D. creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in WRONG.-Lack of THAT after revealed..(revealed that ...)-again same as C its a fragment.

E. creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasingWRONG.-use of which is wrong....as we know which cant refer to a CLAUSE hence it is either refering to FOOD SUPPLIES or DWINDLING(not a noun)..in both cases sentence doesnt makes sense.

hence B _________________

When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe ...then you will be successfull....

as a result of is correct idiom to use here to show cause of "dwindling food supplies"

A: resulting from increasing - awkward
B. seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindlingthe cause and effect both are shown as continuing in parallel. I thought the suffering was because of dwindling food supplies not because of the dwindling process

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

B) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in

C) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing

between these two, I pick C coz " increasing" ,as a V-ing, can express a process ...and we're talking about a process here :
were dwindling....increasing temperature ( as a noun) .....during .......

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

A) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing

B) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in

C) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing

IMO, what "resulting from increasing..." is "dwindling food supplies" ...A makes "resulting...." of the "suffering"

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

A) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing B) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase inC) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing

why not A?

IMO, what "resulting from increasing..." is "dwindling food supplies" ...A makes "resulting...." of the "suffering"

absolutly. the PP "resulting........." doesnot modify the dwindling food supplies. the PP modifies the whole clause not a particular phrase. therefore A is incorrect.